Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

MPA risk based assurance_ Phil Kemp


Published on

Presentation at APM event How risk drives assurance and how assurance drives risk! Tuesday 19th May 2015 in London.

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

MPA risk based assurance_ Phil Kemp

  1. 1. Major Projects Authority 1 Horse Guards Road, London Risk Based Assurance Phil Kemp MPA Operations Lead
  2. 2. Coverage - About the MPA - Using risk potential as a driver - Risk based assurance provision - Summary - 2
  3. 3. About the MPA Old OGC (projects team) Oversight of 42 projects worth £10.5 billion, tracked within the Major Projects Portfolio (MPP) – not mandatory. Assurance reviews of central civil government High Risk projects (150- 170 reviews pa). Departments had delegated authority for medium risk project reviews May 2010 General Election Coalition Government – refocus of priorities June 2010 National Audit Office Report – “Assurance for High Risk Projects” “The role of assurance is to provide information to those that sponsor, govern and manage a project to help them make better informed decisions which reduce the causes of project failure, promote the conditions for success and deliver improved outcomes.” 3Major Projects Authority 2015
  4. 4. About the MPA • January 2011 Prime Minister confirmed the mandate for the new Major Projects Authority (MPA) - replacing the former OGC Projects team • A collaboration between the CO, HMT and Departments’ to significantly improve the success rate of projects • Enforceable mandate to develop the Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) and, in collaboration with departments, to provide verified, timely data, with regular reporting to Ministers • MPA managed assurance reviews for all GMPP Projects with each having an approved Integrated Assurance and Approval Plan, including timetables for Treasury approvals, validated by the MPA and HMT. • To carry out Assurance Reviews highest risk projects or where there is cause for concern and that departments co-operate with MPA to take action to address any issues raised. • Escalate concerns to Ministers and Accounting Officers - intervene directly where projects are causing concern 4Major Projects Authority 2015
  5. 5. About the MPA • Starting Gate or equivalent, are mandatory for all new Projects/Programmes to assess deliverability before project delivery gets underway • Work with departments to build capability in Projects and Programme management • Publication of project information consistent with the Coalition’s Transparency agenda. Collaboration with departments to publish an annual report on the GMPP. “ The Prime Minister requires all Departments to comply with the MPA Mandate for Starting Gate (or equivalent) Reviews, assurance reviews, integrated assurance planning and reporting” 5Major Projects Authority 2015
  6. 6. Using Risk Potential as a driver To inform - Inclusion in the GMPP - Assurance provision - In the assurance opinion - Delivery Confidence Assessment - Need for intervention or support - Reviewer accreditation 6Major Projects Authority 2015
  7. 7. Risk Potential Assessment (RPA) RPA tool - a Project’s self- assessment of: • Impact (Consequential) • Political • Public • Operational business and commercial change • Financial • Dependencies 7 Table A Consequential Impact Assessment A strategic assessment of the consequential impact should the initiative fail to deliver its objectives to time, cost or quality Strategic Impact Area Very Low Low Med High Very High A1. Political None, or unlikely to have any political interest. As a prerequisite for major policy initiative or manifesto commitment, a high level of on-going Ministerial or political interest. Likelihood of PAC, or equivalent strategic body, interest. Explanatory Notes (Completion mandatory) A2. Public No public service impact. No information security or environmental implications. No interest from external pressure groups likely. Significant public or business interest, e.g. related to information security, or to environmental issues. High degree of interest from pressure groups or media. Involves contentious change. Explanatory Notes (Completion mandatory) A3. Financial Little or no exposure of public funds or additional financial burden. No financial impact from environment or social costs. Limited or no savings to be delivered. Very significant financial exposure of public funds, or additional financial burden. Significant financial impact from environmental or social change. Will, or likely to, require HM Treasury financial approval. Very significant savings expected to be delivered. Explanatory Notes (Completion mandatory) A4. Operational business and commercial change Low priority, limited impact on the organisation’s administration, operations or staff. No impact on third party organisations. No changes to regulatory requirements. Departmental priority, addressing high profile business issue. Essential to fulfil legislative/legal requirements. Significant impact or additional burden on business or staff, on external commercial markets, regulations or trade. The change is novel or contentious. Explanatory Notes (Completion mandatory) A5. Dependencies Stand alone - no dependency on, or for, other change initiatives, programmes or projects. Highly dependent on other legislation, programmes, projects or change initiatives for its successful delivery, and/or vice versa. Explanatory Notes (Completion mandatory) Overall Consequential Impact Assessment A6. Little or no impact on the public, political stakeholders, public finances, operational business or dependent programmes/projects VL L M H VH Very high impact on the public, political stakeholders, public finances, operational business or dependent programmes/projects Explanatory Notes (Completion Mandatory) [Note: If score is Very Low (VL) completion of Table B below is optional. If Table B is not completed, note this score in Box 14 on the cover sheet. Alternatively, this score is to be used in Table C if Table B is completed.] Major Projects Authority 2015
  8. 8. Risk Potential Assessment • Complexity • 22 questions covering • Strategic Profile • Delivery • Capability & Capacity • Scale 8 Table B Programme/Project Complexity Assessment An assessment of the complexity factors that may affect the achievement of the programme/project objectives B1Strategic Profile Very Low Low Med High Very High B1.1. Political No political involvement or not requiring any special handling or additional engagement. Multiple political interests requiring handling. Political agenda changing, unclear direction or increasing opposition. External political interests involved e.g. EU. Explanatory Notes B1.2. Public No or very low public profile. No change in public interest or service provision. No interest from external pressure groups. Very high public profile, significant interest from public and/or from active pressure groups/media. Complex external communications. Explanatory Notes B1.3. Business performance No significant change to the organisation’s business. No change to the operation of external bodies. Very high business performance profile. Changing demands or expectations of performance or staff or behaviours. Significant increase in delivery status expected. Explanatory Notes B1.4. Organisational objectives No links to strategic targets or published performance indicators. Strategic status (portfolio position), mandate and objectives clear, stable and unlikely to change. Critical link to delivery of key strategic objectives and/or published targets. Strategic status, mandate or objectives likely to change. Explanatory Notes Strategic Profile summary assessment Strategic profile low, changes unlikely to threaten objectives VL L M H VH Strategic profile very high and changes highly likely to threaten achievement of objectives Explanatory Notes (Completion Mandatory) [Note: Record summary assessment mark to Complexity Assessment Summary table below] Major Projects Authority 2015
  9. 9. Risk Potential Assessment RPA result plotted from Impact and complexity scores Assessment validated by - SRO - Departmental Assurance Coordinator (DAC) - MPA (Operations Lead) 9Major Projects Authority 2015 Table C Risk Potential Assessment Plot overall summary assessments from Table A (line A6) and Table B (line B5) and mark with an X in grid below Overall Consequential Impact Assessment (Table A summary) Very High High Risk High Medium Risk X Medium Low Very Low Low Risk Very Low Low Medium High Very High Overall Complexity Assessment (Table B summary)
  10. 10. What is the GMPP? Government Major Projects Portfolio (GMPP) • The portfolio consists of all projects or programmes that require HM Treasury approval, have a High Risk potential (from RPA), or are seen as failing, novel and/or contentious by HMT or CO. • Projects are subject to review using products from the MPA’s assurance toolkit • MPA lead the planning, coordination and provision of assurance activities throughout the “policy to delivery” lifecycle • Every project on the GMPP requires an integrated assurance and approval plan (IAAP) • The projects report quarterly to MPA – MPA report to CO & HMT ministers – Summary reports to Departments – Q2 feeds directly in to the MPA Annual Report 10Major Projects Authority 2015
  11. 11. GMPP Summary (as at Sept 2013 from 2014 MPA Annual Report (published May 2014) 11Major Projects Authority 2015
  12. 12. GMPP Projects by project type • The impact and significance of projects is not, however, illustrated by cost alone • Major projects are not all about infrastructure or military equipment • The majority of GMPP projects consist of programmes to deliver transformation 12Major Projects Authority 2015
  13. 13. Risk based assurance provision Initiation Project Validation Review (formally known as Starting Gate) - Mandated for those High Risk potential change initiatives (that will be delivered through a GMPP project) - Informing strategic decision making (for the Strategic Business Case and portfolio management) - Strategic focus on delivery considerations, preparation & readiness - Workshop based approach - Helping get projects right at outset 13Major Projects Authority 2015
  14. 14. Risk based assurance provision During project delivery OGC Gateway™ reviews and Project Assessment Reviews - At tranche ends, - At key decision points, milestones and supporting approvals - When major re-baselining required - Forward looking, looking at risks ahead - Assurance through on Delivery Confidence Assessment (Time/cost/outcomes(benefits/quality)) - Embedded assurance – ongoing assurance input on highest risk projects 14Major Projects Authority 2015
  15. 15. Intervention (Consequential assurance) - Focus on highest areas of risk - “Right” actions taken to address risks - Focus on improving delivery confidence - Assurance of Action Plan Review following Red/Amber-Red DCA - Targeted consequential assurance review Support - Facilitating placement of senior managers - Facilitating provision programme Board Non-Execs - Act as the “AA Man” – “we know a person who can” 15Major Projects Authority 2015 Risk based assurance provision
  16. 16. - Risk potential assessments are embedded throughout MPA processes and practices which provides: - Focus - Consistency - Informs end to end assurance provision - Strategic reporting - Risk based assurance through: - Integrated assurance and approvals - Appropriate coverage timing - With appropriately skilled reviewer provision - Targeted follow up and support 16 Summary Major Projects Authority 2015
  17. 17. MPA ensuring “Right Projects Right” 17Major Projects Authority 2015